Ulster Scots Academy

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which consultants have been consulted by the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure concerning the proposed Ulster Scots academy; on what topics they have been consulted; when; and how much each consultant has been paid to date.

Baroness Amos: Deloitte MCS Limited was retained on 22 September 2003 to undertake a business case, in accordance with the guidance contained in HM Treasury's Green Book, Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government, a copy of which is available in the Library, on the joint declaration commitment to take steps to encourage support to be made available to an Ulster Scots academy. Mr Donal O Ragan, an independent consultant who provides advice on issues pertaining to regional or minority languages to the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure, was also consulted on aspects of the business case.
	With regard to the costs of these consultancy services, in line with Part II Paragraph 13 (third party's commercial confidences) of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information, it would be inappropriate to disclose this information.

Questions for Written Answer: Response Times

Lord Jopling: asked the Leader of the House:
	What explanation she has received during her weekly inquiries of departments about questions for Written Answer which have not been answered in the standard two weeks from the Department of Health which answered a Question by the Baroness Finlay of Llandaff on 29 March, seven weeks after it was tabled on 9 February.

Baroness Amos: As is usual practice, the Question was discussed at Front-Bench meetings after the two-week deadline had passed.
	In addition, I received a copy of the letter sent from Lord Warner to Baroness Finlay of 5 March apologising and giving an explanation for the delay in answering the Question.

Lord Chancellor: Abolition of Office

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, during or before 2001, a Minister committed them, by written or oral statement, to introduce legislation to eliminate any function of the Lord Chancellor or the complete abolition of that office; and, if so, on what date and occasions.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Government first announced their plan to abolish the office of Lord Chancellor in June 2003. In giving evidence to the Select Committee my predecessor indicated that he was ready to consult on the possibility of a judicial appointments commission.
	I am not aware of any oral or written statement by the Government during or before 2001 on the abolition of the Lord Chancellor.

Consolidation Acts

Lord Brightman: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many Consolidation Acts have been passed in the Sessions: (a) 1984–89; (b) 1989–1994; (c) 1994–99; and (d) 1999 to date.

Lord Filkin: The number of Consolidation Acts that have been passed are as follows—
	
		
			
			  (a) 1984–85 to 1988–89 22 
			  (b) 1989–90 to 1993–94 29 
			  (c) 1994–95 to 1998–99 14 
			  (d) 1999–2000 to 2003–04 2 
		
	
	These figures do not include Acts which extend only to Scotland or to Northern Ireland. In some instances, more than one Act was necessary to cover a subject, and in some of those cases, a further Act containing consequential provisions was necessary. Such Acts have been included in the figures.

Eritrea and Ethiopia

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they believe a meeting between the Eritrean authorities and the United Nations Secretary-General's special envoy might contribute towards the acceptance by Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission's decision on delimitation of their common border.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The UN Secretary-General has asked his special envoy to explore with both parties the ways in which the Algiers agreement and the decision of the Boundary Commission can be implemented. We are giving the special envoy's mission our full support.

European Union: National Parliaments

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the qualifications of citizenship and residence, including the number of years required where necessary, for election or appointment to the upper House of Parliament in each member state of the European Union.[HL2173]John B

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Portugal, Denmark, Finland, Greece and Sweden have no upper House. In all other EU member states, membership of their upper House is restricted to their citizens. Many member states (Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Austria, Germany) have residence criteria but none requires that a person should have been resident for a set period of time before becoming eligible for membership of its upper House.

European Union: Penalty Payments

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What mechanism exists to ensure the payment of fines imposed by the European Union—
	(a) on member states; and
	(b) on commercial enterprises such as Microsoft.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The penalty payments imposed by the European Union are intended to encourage the member state to bring its law into conformity with Community law. They apply from the date of judgment and not retrospectively. It can be expected that the member states will respect the decision of the Court to impose a penalty payment in accordance with their duty under Article 10 of the Treaty Establishing European Community to take all appropriate measures resulting from actions taken by the institutions of the Community. Although the Commission regularly takes member states to court, there have been only two cases where fines were imposed. The countries in question were Greece and Spain and they paid the fines as imposed by the European Court of Justice.
	Enforcement in relation to member states and commercial enterprises is dealt with in the EC Treaty. Article 244 provides that judgments of the Court of Justice shall be enforceable under the conditions laid down in Article 256. Article 256 gives detailed provision for the enforcement of financial obligations in accordance with the rules of civil procedure in the relevant member state. The Microsoft ruling is not the first of its kind; many commercial enterprises have been fined before and the fines have been paid.

European Union: Penalty Payments

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which institution receives fines imposed by the European Union; and for what purposes the fines can be used.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: When the EU imposes a fine on a member state, the money received is paid directly into the EU budget. The fines are therefore used for the same purpose as the standard budget, which includes boosting economic development and fostering pan-European research and education.

Iraq: Legal Advice

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 25 March (WA 108), in what way disclosure of the date when the Government first sought legal advice about the legality of an invasion of Iraq, as distinct from the content of such advice, "would harm the frankness and candour of internal discussion" within the meaning of exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: There is nothing in exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information which requires disclosure of the date of any information in cases where that information itself may be withheld.

Iraq: Legal Advice

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 25 March (WA 108), in what way disclosure of the date when the Government first sought legal advice about the legality of an invasion of Iraq, as distinct from the content of such advice, falls within exemption 4(d) of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information as "Information covered by legal professional privilege".

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The right to receive legal advice in confidence includes the right not to disclose whether legal advice has been sought or given and if so on what date.

Iraq: Legal Advice

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 25 March (WA 108), whether since they have made public the fact that the Attorney-General has given legal advice to them on the legality of an invasion of Iraq the practice of not disclosing whether particular advice was sought or obtained has been affected.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: No. The practice of not disclosing whether particular advice was sought or obtained has not been affected. In view of the high level of public interest in the proposed military action against Iraq, the Attorney-General, exceptionally, made a Written Statement in Parliament on 17 March 2003 setting out his view of the legal basis for the use of force against Iraq.

Asylum Policy

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What has been their legislative and other response to the "particular concern" expressed by the European Commission against racism and intolerance, in its Second Report on the United Kingdom, adopted on 16 June 2000, regarding the "Effect of changes to immigration and asylum policies on the situation and public perception of asylum seekers, refugees and minority groups".

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government's response was published along with the report itself. The Government rejected then, and reject now, the argument that necessary measures taken to prevent abuse of the right of asylum can be held responsible for manifestations of racism and xenophobia. Since the report and the United Kingdom's response were published, the system of issuing vouchers to asylum seekers has been discontinued.

Independent Police Complaints Commission

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the estimated cost of setting up the new Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The programme of work setting up the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and the new police complaints system began in September 2002. In 2002–03 the budget for the implementation of the new complaints system, which included the establishment of the IPCC, was approximately £1.7 million. In 2003–04, the IPCC's set-up year, the Home Office allocated £15 million resource expenditure and £11.5 million capital expenditure to the IPCC.

Independent Police Complaints Commission

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What additional resources are required by police forces to respond to the new Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Neither the Home Office nor the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has required police forces to devote additional resources to respond to the new complaints system and no additional money has been provided.
	Any changes to the resources allocated to this area have been determined by police forces themselves within their existing budgets. These changes have not been quantified and to do so would incur a disproportionate cost.
	While it is impossible to predict exactly, it is believed that the new system will bring both costs and savings for police forces, with the intention of greater efficiency over the long term. The exact resource implications of the new system will be informed by early operational experience.

Independent Police Complaints Commission

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the guidance about the new Independent Police Complaints Commission will be published.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Home Office has produced interim guidance on the new complaints system and the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to inform preparation and early operation. This guidance was distributed to all police forces in February 2004.
	The Police Reform Act 2002 gives the IPCC responsibility for providing statutory guidance about the new complaints system. The IPCC intends to produce this statutory guidance from October 2004 based on consultation and the experience gained in the period following its launch on 1 April 2004.

Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003: Guns

The Earl of Shrewsbury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have provided the public with adequate information to enable them to surrender gas cartridge air weapons or to apply for Section 1 firearms licences, in order to comply with the requirements of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: All police forces in England, Wales and Scotland were made aware of the changes in the law. In addition, the Home Office produced a number of posters and leaflets which explained what people must do if they wanted to keep any guns they already had. These were sent to all forces for display and further distribution as they saw fit.
	The changes were also discussed with the relevant trade organisations who shared our wish to ensure that as many dealers as possible and their customers were aware of how the new law would affect them. They were also sent copies of the posters and leaflets together with a special sticker for them to put on tins of air gun pellets as a reminder of the change in legislation.
	We are continuing to work with the police—and any other interested organisations—with a view to securing further local and national publicity.

Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003: Guns

The Earl of Shrewsbury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many gas cartridge air weapons, as restricted by the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003—
	(a) are currently in circulation in the United Kingdom; and
	(b) have been surrendered to date.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: It is estimated that around 70,000 of these weapons were sold but there is no information available regarding the number currently in circulation in the United Kingdom.
	No running total is being kept centrally of the number surrendered to date.

Local Authority Election Voting

Lord Harrison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Rooker on 7 November 2002 (WA 131), whether they agree with the view of the Electoral Commission that a citizen registered to vote in two different local authorities may vote in both authorities on the same day.

Lord Rooker: The Government is aware of the Electoral Commission's view that it is legal to vote in elections for two different local councils and this is under consideration.

Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order: ODPM Responsibility

Lord Brookman: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which directorate and division of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will have responsibility for the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order once it has been implemented.

Lord Rooker: Buildings Division in the Sustainable Communities Group of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is expected to be responsible for the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order once it has been implemented.

Defence School of Languages

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the arrangements for foreign language training for British military personnel other than at the Defence Schools of Languages and what was the cost of this training in the most recent year for which figures are available.

Lord Bach: Over 77 per cent of foreign language training for British military personnel, measured in terms of man training days, is provided under the auspices of the Defence Intelligence and Security Centre (DISC), Chicksands. This includes training at the Defence School of Languages, the Defence Special Signals School and under outsourcing arrangements, for languages where demand is limited, to the extent that it is not cost-effective to retain permanent staff on the establishment.
	Some 11 per cent of foreign language training is delivered across the following units—22 SAS in Hereford, Salmond House Training Centre in Rheindahlen, Gurkha Language Wing in Catterick, the Brigade of Gurkhas in Nepal and the Britannia Royal Naval College in Dartmouth. Low-level language training for orientation purposes, making up 12 per cent of the overall total, is provided in Germany and Cyprus. The cost of this training is not identified separately and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Defence School of Languages

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the levels of foreign language skills of regular and reserve British military personnel broken down by colloquial, linguist and interpreter level.

Lord Bach: The terms colloquial, linguist and interpreter are now obsolete. British military personnel are assessed in accordance with NATO STANAG 6001 in the four skill areas of listening, speaking, reading and writing. Grades are as follows:
	Level 0—No practical proficiency
	Level 1—Elementary
	Level 2—Fair (Limited working)
	Level 3—Good (Minimum professional)
	Level 4—Very good (Full professional)
	Level 5—Excellent (Native/bilingual).
	Single Services record the individual's level of proficiency in each skill area, expressed as a standard language profile (SLP). (Example: SLP 3321 means level 3 in listening, level 3 in speaking, level 2 in reading and level 1 in writing). The Defence Language Co-ordination Cell (DLCC) has access to these records, which can be searched as necessary in order to confirm the capability available to defence in a given language at a specified level. Work is under way between the DLCC and the single Services to ensure that the records are complete.
	In total, the department trains personnel to elementary level or above in approximately 50 languages, plus dialects where appropriate.

Military Exercises

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What major military training exercises they have planned for 2004 and 2005.

Lord Bach: The British Armed Forces plan to conduct a great variety of training each year. This ranges from company-level unit training exercises through to large-scale joint and multinational events with NATO and other allied nations. Regular crisis management exercises also take place at the higher command levels involving participation by other government departments.

Nuclear Submarine Personnel: Health Monitoring

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 4 March (WA 114) on nuclear submarines, how the monitoring referred to in the Answer is carried out given that IPM 7 detectors cannot be used due to space constraints on submarines.

Lord Bach: Personnel exiting submarine reactor compartments are monitored (by suitably qualified and experienced workers) using hand-held instrumentation capable of detecting very low levels of radioactive contamination. In addition, after leaving submarines, all staff have the opportunity to use a walk-through monitor similar to the IPM 7. The purpose of this equipment is to provide reassurance to personnel leaving controlled areas, and is compulsory where contamination is suspected or found on exiting the reactor compartment.

Support Vehicle Project

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the preferred bidder for the Support Vehicle contract will be selected by late 2004.

Lord Bach: As I stated in my Answer to the noble Lord's Question of 23 February 2004 (Official Report, col. WA 5), and in my response during the recent debate on defence policy, on current plans an announcement on selection of a preferred bidder for the Support Vehicle project will be made later in the spring. I regret that the date shown on the website of the Defence Procurement Agency, to which I believe the noble Lord is referring, is incorrect and has been amended.

Investment in Modern Technology

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will quantify, on a project-by-project basis, the investment of "over £6 billion in modern technology" mentioned in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's Budget speech.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Treasury does not have this information on a project-by-project basis. The "over £6 billion" consists of ring-fenced allocations for electronic government made in Spending Review 2000, Spending Review 2002 and from the Capital Modernisation Fund, plus subsequent announcements. It includes: £2.3 billion for the NHS; £0.8 billion for revenue departments; £1.2 billion for schools; £0.1 billion for the Department for Work and Pensions; £0.1 billion for the driver vehicle organisations; £0.1 billion for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; £1.1 billion for the criminal justice system; £0.7 billion for local government; and £0.1 billion for the Department of Trade and Industry.

Wolfson Molecular Imaging Centre

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proportion of the budget of Manchester's Wolfson Molecular Imaging Centre is allocated from central government funds; what consideration they have given to representations from Members of the House of Lords for increased public funding of the centre's research into cancer cures for the future; and what further action they are considering.

Lord Warner: Details of the total budget of the Wolfson Molecular Imaging Centre are a matter for the centre and are not routinely reported to government. There is no direct National Health Service involvement in the funding of the Wolfson Centre. However, the centre has received funding from National Translational Cancer Research Network (NTRAC) Manchester to appoint three core posts, radiochemist, radiographer and a data analyst/modeller. Further funding from NTRAC Manchester will be decided at local level. In 2002 the Department of Health announced that NTRAC nationally will receive £11.16 million over five years.
	In addition, the North West Development Agency (NWDA) has provided £50,000 for consultancy fees towards the preparation of a business plan for the centre. The centre has submitted an application for funding which is currently in the NWDA appraisal system.
	Major equipment for the centre is being provided via the Government's north-west science initiative, funded jointly by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). The applicants Professor David Gordon (Manchester) and Dr Christopher Hall (Daresbury Laboratory) refer to this investment forming an institute for functional and molecular imaging (IFMI). Co-applicants include Professors Pat Price and Terry Jones, and researchers from Liverpool and Salford. Total investment is £5.7 million split equally between MRC and EPSRC. The applicants are also involved in an MRC e-science award of a little over £1 million and a MRC co-operative.

Simvastatin

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether low-income patients at low to moderate risk of cardiovascular disease will have access to simvastatin on prescription, should its status be changed from a prescription-only to a pharmacy medicine.[HL2024]John B — with query

Lord Warner: General practitioners will continue to prescribe for patients on the basis of their assessment of individual clinical need, as they do now. The Committee on Safety of Medicines has recently been considering their advice on whether simvastatin 10mg should be switched from prescription-only to be available for sale by pharmacists.

BSE: Calves Born in UK in 2003

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their best estimate of the number of calves born in the United Kingdom in 2003 with BSE.

Lord Whitty: We do not expect any calves born in 2003 to have BSE because the national feed controls should be effective and the introduction of the ban on the use of mammalian protein in farm livestock in other EU member states in January 2001 should provide additional security.

Albatrosses and Petrels

Lord Bowness: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why they have not ratified the International Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels; and when they expect so to do.

Lord Whitty: Regrettably ratification was delayed while legal issues associated with the UK's membership of the European Union were considered. However, a way forward has been found and the UK will ratify this agreement very shortly.

Animal Disease Control: Culls and Disposal Methods

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What disposal methods would be used in any future mass cull, whether of wild animals or farm livestock, in the light of both the fallen stock regulations and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' rejection of mass funeral pyres.

Lord Whitty: The disposal methods that would be employed in the event of a mass cull of animals for disease control purposes, such as in an outbreak of foot and mouth disease or other exotic disease, are detailed in chapter 4 of the Defra Foot and Mouth Disease Contingency Plan, the latest version of which will be laid before Parliament on 31 March. The agreed disposal hierarchy is incineration, rendering, licensed commercial landfill, on-farm burial and pyre burning. The methods set out in the contingency plan comply with the requirements of the EC Animal By-Products Regulation.
	Although on-farm burning and burial of carcases (and off-farm disposal in a licensed landfill site) are banned under the Animal By-Products Regulation, the regulation provides that these disposal options may be used where necessary in the event of an outbreak of an exotic disease such as foot and mouth disease or in remote areas.
	In the event that a decision is taken to cull farm livestock or wild animals to control an endemic disease, slaughter and disposal will be planned in advance and where appropriate the carcases will be disposed of by rendering or incineration.

International Plant Protection Convention

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the International Plant Protection Convention applies to member states of the European Community as separate countries; and whether each may therefore adopt its own rules regarding, for example, inspection, prohibition on importation and treatment.

Lord Whitty: The International Plant Protection Convention applies to individual countries. For different issues there is agreement between the European Commission and member states on which has responsibility. For imports, European Community plant health legislation lays down requirements on inspection and restrictions; this legislation must be respected by all member states. Import restrictions vary from prohibition of some products, such as seed potatoes from most origins, to requirements for freedom of consignments from specified pests and diseases. In some cases the detailed requirements designed to ensure that consignments are free from pests and diseases include a requirement for treatment.

Fruit Producers

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How fruit producers will be treated under the common agricultural policy reforms recently announced by the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; and whether there will be any difference in treatment (a) between orchard owners who graze livestock in their orchards and those who do not; and (b) between producers of dessert apples and producers of soft fruit.

Lord Whitty: From 2005, the single payment will replace many existing direct payment schemes in the UK.
	The payment will be delivered in each region determined for this purpose in England on a flat-rate basis including, during a transitional period to 2012, a reducing element based on individual historical subsidy receipts. It may be claimed against eligible hectares.
	Eligible hectares do not include land under permanent crops. The definition of permanent crops has not yet been finalised but is expected to cover crops which normally remain in the ground for five years or more. For the avoidance of doubt, certain "multi-annual crops", such as soft fruit, are likely to be excluded from the definition of permanent crops.
	Orchard crops (apples, pears, cherries and plums) are recognised as permanent crops and the single payment will generally not be available in respect of land on which they are grown. The presence or absence of livestock will not be a material consideration. The one possible exception to this is where the tree density is very low. This is still an area of evolving policy where the rules remain to be finalised.

Genetically Modified Maize

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the appropriate advisory committees have seen the recent Chardon LL cattle feeding studies conducted for Bayer CropScience; and whether these studies confirm that Chardon LL maize silage is safe for cattle to eat.

Lord Whitty: I understand that Bayer CropScience commissioned Reading University to undertake this cattle feeding study involving their GM maize T25 (Chardon LL) and that the researchers intend to submit the results of their study to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. The data will be assessed once the peer review process is complete and the appropriate advisory committees consulted as necessary.
	Under the terms of Directive 2001/18, Bayer would have been required to notify the French competent authority, which issued the relevant consent on behalf of all EU member states, if this study had revealed any adverse effects on the cattle fed T25 forage. Both the researchers at Reading University and Bayer have confirmed that the study did not reveal any such adverse effects.
	The Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF) has advised, on the basis of the data already submitted, that it is content that the T25 maize grain and its products pose no more risk as animal feed than non-GM maize varieties. At present Bayer GM maize T25 cannot be grown in the UK for use as feed for livestock because it does not have all the necessary approvals for cultivation.

Genetically Modified Maize

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will commission a repeat of the 1998–99 seed list trials for Chardon LL maize in view of the fact that the herbicide used in the trials is shortly to be withdrawn.

Lord Whitty: The herbicides used in trials to assess value for cultivation and use (VCU) follow best local practice at the time. All candidate and control varieties are treated in the same way in each trial, so that valid comparisons of variety performance can be made. It is therefore not necessary to repeat the trials when best local practice changes.

Genetically Modified Maize

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether VCU Herbage Group asked that the specific GM characteristics of Chardon LL maize be assessed prior to the commencement of the national list trials; if so, why this request was refused; and by whom.

Lord Whitty: The remit of the Herbage VCU Group includes making recommendations on the assessment of any special characteristics claimed by national list applicants in respect of a variety's value for cultivation and use (VCU). In the case of Chardon LL the variety's resistance to the herbicide glufosinate ammonium was not claimed by the applicant to be a special characteristic for the purpose of the VCU trials and therefore did not need to be assessed.

Genetically Modified Maize

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will give an assurance that no steps will be taken to facilitate the commercialisation of Chardon LL maize in the United Kingdom until a review of all of the studies available on the physiological impacts of feeding genetically modified materials to ruminants, such as cattle and sheep, has been conducted and published.

Lord Whitty: Chardon LL maize already has a Part C marketing consent for use as any other maize (this includes use as animal feed). This consent was issued in 1998 under Directive 90/220/EC following collective assessment by all EU member states.
	The Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) and the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF) carried out a comprehensive review of the risks posed by the marketing and use of Bayer GM maize T25 (Chardon LL) in response to concerns raised in the Chardon LL public hearing on seed listing in December 2002. ACAF advised, on the basis of the data already submitted, that it is content that the T25 maize grain and its products pose no more risk as animal feed than non-GM maize varieties.
	If new information becomes available, either from animal feeding studies or from any other source, which changes the assessment of the risks to human health or the environment then action can be taken under Directive 2001/18 (which replaced Directive 90/220) to restrict or suspend the release.

Livestock Farmers: Severely Disadvantaged Areas

Lord Carter: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proposals they have to deal with any problems of livestock farmers in the severely disadvantaged areas (SDAs) resulting from the decision to divide England into two regions (SDA and non-SDA) for the purposes of implementing common agricultural policy reform.

Lord Whitty: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has expressed her willingness to consider a small modification to the scheme to create a further region of moorland within the SDA if a case can be made that commands a broad consensus. As a consequence she is now considering such a request put to her jointly by a number of representative organisations.

Livestock Farmers: Severely Disadvantaged Areas

Lord Carter: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have considered the effect on livestock farmers in severely disadvantaged areas (SDAs) if England were divided into three regions (Moorland, SDA excluding Moorland and non-SDA) for the purposes of implementing common agricultural policy reform.

Lord Whitty: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has expressed her willingness to consider a small modification to the scheme to create a further region of moorland within the SDA if a case can be made that commands a broad consensus. As a consequence she is now considering such a request put to her jointly by a number of representative organisations.

"Terra Marique"

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the environmental benefit that supports the award of £8.5 million freight facility grant for the construction of the ship, the "Terra Marique".

Lord Davies of Oldham: The grant was not justified on the basis of environmental benefits alone. The department took the view that by taking the largest and most disruptive loads off busy roads, the investment would over the next 20 years reduce congestion and corresponding costs to society.

"Terra Marique"

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much private sector capital was levered in by the award of £8.5 million freight facility grant for the construction of the "Terra Marique"; who is the owner of this ship; and what assurances have been given as to the availability of commercial contracts for the ship in the United Kingdom.[HL2161]clean

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Government have met all the design and construction costs. Robert Wynn and Sons Ltd owns the vessel and carries the commercial risks of operating it. No assurances have been given about the availability of commercial contracts for the ship in the UK.

Traffic Management Bill

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have had from the chairman of the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority in regard to the Traffic Management Bill; what reply they have sent; and what action they are taking.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The chairman of the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority wrote to ministerial colleagues earlier this month seeking amendments to the Traffic Management Bill. This would place a requirement on the face of the Bill for passenger transport executivies to be notified when utility street works are carried out in their area. I understand that colleagues will be replying shortly, setting out their views on whether primary legislation is needed to achieve this goal, or whether it is more appropriate for secondary legislation and statutory guidance. Officials in the Department for Transport met with representatives of the passenger transport executives, including those from Manchester, earlier this week to discuss the Bill.
	Over the coming months we will be looking at the notification of all works in the highway as part of drawing up the secondary legislation and guidance underpinning the Bill. We will be consulting the passenger transport authorities, and other relevant bodies, as part of this exercise before deciding exactly what changes should be made to the existing arrangements.

Water Freight Grants

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What grants have been made in England and Wales in the past five years for coastal or European shipping and inland waterway traffic, together with the amount of private sector funding levered in.[HL2225]John B

Lord Davies of Oldham: We have awarded 41 water freight grants since 1999 amounting to a total of £43.9 million that have attracted private contributions of £10.7 million towards eligible capital expenditure.
	These figures relate to eligible expenditure only, i.e. investments directly connected with transferring traffic from road to water. Companies may make further investments, e.g. in processing plants, that are connected with the grant. The department does not have data for these investments as there is no requirement for applicants to provide figures for non-eligible costs.

A13: Roundabout

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the double roundabout junction between the A13 and A130 trunk roads is safe and adequate for traffic flows; and, if not, whether they will replace it with a grade separated junction.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The junction at Sadlers Farm between the A13 and the A130 (neither of which is a trunk road at that point) is in the form of a ring roundabout, being five mini roundabouts around a large central roundabout. The current design was built by Essex County Council in 1988 to solve the problems of congestion at that time and for the foreseeable future.
	Following a review of the transport problems in the south Essex area, Essex County Council considers that the junction now requires upgrading to allow for the greater volume of traffic which is using the junction since it was installed.
	It is up to Essex County Council to submit, through the local transport plan process, details of a new design which has been appraised in accordance with government guidelines and which will deal with the current and forecast levels of traffic at the junction. This assessment will then be used by the Department for Transport to consider whether there is a case for funding the scheme.

A13: Litter

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider the amount of litter on the A13 trunk road between Dagenham and the junction with the A130 to be acceptable; and, if not, what action they propose to have it removed.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Cleansing of this section of the A13 is variously the responsibility of the Mayor and Transport for London, Thurrock Borough Council and Basildon Borough Council. The authorities are very aware of the poor impression made by litter, and maintain a regular programme to remove it.

Crossrail

Lord Harris of Haringey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there is likely to be sufficient capacity on the proposed Crossrail scheme to add further branches to north-west London at a later date.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Cross-London Rail Links (CLRL) business case submitted in July 2003 would fully utilise the available capacity. I understand that CLRL considered but did not pursue a north-west London branch in developing this business case.

Railways: Virgin Rail Group

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the interim agreement entered into by the Strategic Rail Authority and Virgin Rail Group in July 2002 allows for the stringent evaluation procedure at the negotiation to fail to reach an agreement satisfactory to the taxpayer; and, if so, what would then be the result.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The interim agreement contemplates a conclusion of negotiations, whether successfully or otherwise. It does not prescribe what either party to the negotiations must do in such circumstances. The taxpayer's interests are protected through control of the budgets for both franchises. Depending upon the outcome of the negotiations and annual review of the budgets, it is possible that the interim agreements would remain in force until 2012, when both franchises expire, or that either or both franchises may come to an end earlier.